Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-24-2018, 10:09 AM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,809 posts, read 26,385,498 times
Reputation: 25704

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Myghost View Post
I don't have a problem, or even really know much about Bezos, other than his role at Amazon, and I use their service all the time. I'm a happy Prime subscriber.

That being said, your comment is missing a point. The point is that someone like Bezos (or Walmart, or many others) has power to make it "not that simple". They have been given such control over aspects of our economy, that it's not simple to avoid buying from Amazon and Walmart, and even if you do, it means your choices are very limited, and you will pay a higher price, and be at a disadvantage. That's a choice we all have to make, and I'm mostly OK with it. But to call it simple is either ignorant of facts, or just misguided.
And that, my friend, is why these are successful businesses. They offers greater choices, a higher level of service (open when I am not at work for one thing) and better prices than the vast majority of overpriced, small "brick and mortar" shops. The days of being overcharged, getting poor service and needing to take time off work simply to shop at the small, local shop that has an item in my town at least are over. The consumer has far more power now than when we were slaves to small shop owners who overpriced their products, had minimal selection and expected us to work around their schedules.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-24-2018, 10:15 AM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,809 posts, read 26,385,498 times
Reputation: 25704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myghost View Post
New Belgium Brewery, maker of Fat Tire and other beers, is one of many examples. Not on the scale of Amazon, but certainly a success. I'm not advocating for Socialism, but I am responding to your inference that it can't be done.
I know-I pointed out that there are other employee owned companies out there. My challenge is for the OP and others on here that promote socialism to start one of them.

Here's a list of some more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...wned_companies
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2018, 10:47 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
15,507 posts, read 6,392,411 times
Reputation: 4831
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
I know-I pointed out that there are other employee owned companies out there. My challenge is for the OP and others on here that promote socialism to start one of them.

Here's a list of some more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...wned_companies
three things:

1.) I will

2.) worker cooperatives in capitalist countries have to be for profit which eliminates the long term ability of having truly free labor and a free society

3.) Having labor controlled by a few individuals who do not have the personal ability to maintain control is unhealthy for a free economy as it limits labor for others. The replies to Bernie insinuate the same stuff that you claim; "Bezos worked hard, he achieved the American dream, he made prices lower for everyone", etc.

What those like you (and many democrats as well) believe is neither moral nor sustainable. The process of having private power is the same as tyrannies controlling population centers. You allow a monopoly on capital that controls free labor and turns personal input into the hands of the invisible powers (private owners).

This hierarchical authoritarian model restricts freedoms and creates a lack of opportunity for people to exist independently of the centers of power. Capitalism by nature is collective and authoritarian. Bezos does not maintain his business and neither does it function to provide necessary production for society, it is a for profit model that keeps the economy from distributing based off of input.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2018, 12:51 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
36,856 posts, read 17,288,658 times
Reputation: 14459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
No, you are very wrong here. A syndicate only exists to help connect different labor production centers and settle disputes in the realm of work (of which they are connected to, as you know there are many different syndicates).

No one specifies the difference, it’s just an unusual concept for people who live in a privatized environment thinking it makes sense. In reality private ownership needs a state to give the owner a rightful claim over property they have no physical control over. You need government paperwork to signify your ownership of something that you don’t presently control and require government enforcement to keep it that way.

Personal property is just things (not people) that are under your direct influence and things you use. Private property exists under the same logic the state exists.
No, in reality private ownership requires no State because said State demands tribute (see property taxes). You don't own anything under statism: not your house (those pesky property taxes), your body (no drugs for you), or your mind.

You mix your labor with property/homestead it is yours. In your absence it is still yours because homes, hammers, a sheet of poetry don't exist outside of the human experience.

We went over this with the bananas example awhile back. You assign a classification and importance of it for the collective and then that determines its possession/usage.

Your statist system is worse than the current one because at least now a consumer doesn't have to use a good/service as the State sees fit...for the most part.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2018, 12:54 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
36,856 posts, read 17,288,658 times
Reputation: 14459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
three things:

1.) I will

2.) worker cooperatives in capitalist countries have to be for profit which eliminates the long term ability of having truly free labor and a free society

3.) Having labor controlled by a few individuals who do not have the personal ability to maintain control is unhealthy for a free economy as it limits labor for others. The replies to Bernie insinuate the same stuff that you claim; "Bezos worked hard, he achieved the American dream, he made prices lower for everyone", etc.

What those like you (and many democrats as well) believe is neither moral nor sustainable. The process of having private power is the same as tyrannies controlling population centers. You allow a monopoly on capital that controls free labor and turns personal input into the hands of the invisible powers (private owners).

This hierarchical authoritarian model restricts freedoms and creates a lack of opportunity for people to exist independently of the centers of power. Capitalism by nature is collective and authoritarian. Bezos does not maintain his business and neither does it function to provide necessary production for society, it is a for profit model that keeps the economy from distributing based off of input.
Capitalism is the only "system" that isn't authoritarian or collective. No man has to interact with another if he doesn't want to under capitalism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2018, 01:06 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,021,490 times
Reputation: 17189
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
Capitalism is the only "system" that isn't authoritarian or collective. No man has to interact with another if he doesn't want to under capitalism.
Maybe some day we will use such a system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2018, 01:44 PM
 
Location: NC
5,129 posts, read 2,585,537 times
Reputation: 2398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
What does Bernie produce?
bank fraud.. and driving a college to bankruptcy.
Oh wait, that was his wife.


Bernie is just another example of the hypocritical left.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2018, 02:08 PM
 
Location: Manchester NH
15,507 posts, read 6,392,411 times
Reputation: 4831
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
No, in reality private ownership requires no State because said State demands tribute (see property taxes). You don't own anything under statism: not your house (those pesky property taxes), your body (no drugs for you), or your mind.

You mix your labor with property/homestead it is yours. In your absence it is still yours because homes, hammers, a sheet of poetry don't exist outside of the human experience.

We went over this with the bananas example awhile back. You assign a classification and importance of it for the collective and then that determines its possession/usage.

Your statist system is worse than the current one because at least now a consumer doesn't have to use a good/service as the State sees fit...for the most part.
We’ve already been over everything but just one clarification for the banana example.

I said food would be made in a community for base consumption (one of the base needs), you can use a banana however you want, but in the production of food (banana or otherwise) demand that does not involve consumption won’t be considered in the production process (town needs food, grows banana; town has food, but demand by an individual who does not need it for consumption won’t be considered in the production process).

Of course unless an entire community and it’s unions all have a separate want for bananas, then the union can agree that production would be fit to serve that need (want).

Lastly you can grow a banana by yourself, for yourself, and do what you want with it. Let’s say you lived in a town that could only grow bananas and supply chains (via the syndicates) were blocked for some reason, you, as an individual, would probably not have space to grow bananas for your own need as (hypothetically) the union that produced such things that it would grow to take up all the space (farmland) that could grow bananas. You would have to produce outside of union membership in such a case, and like I said before, there would probably be no room for you at the time.

- One final thing I’ll add is that private ownership breeds collectivity as if capital (means of production) are owned by independent people, then free workers would have to work FOR others which naturally groups together the labor pool under one command.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2018, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
36,856 posts, read 17,288,658 times
Reputation: 14459
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Maybe some day we will use such a system.
One can hope.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2018, 02:44 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
36,856 posts, read 17,288,658 times
Reputation: 14459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
We’ve already been over everything but just one clarification for the banana example.

I said food would be made in a community for base consumption (one of the base needs), you can use a banana however you want, but in the production of food (banana or otherwise) demand that does not involve consumption won’t be considered in the production process (town needs food, grows banana; town has food, but demand by an individual who does not need it for consumption won’t be considered in the production process).

Of course unless an entire community and it’s unions all have a separate want for bananas, then the union can agree that production would be fit to serve that need (want).

Lastly you can grow a banana by yourself, for yourself, and do what you want with it. Let’s say you lived in a town that could only grow bananas and supply chains (via the syndicates) were blocked for some reason, you, as an individual, would probably not have space to grow bananas for your own need as (hypothetically) the union that produced such things that it would grow to take up all the space (farmland) that could grow bananas. You would have to produce outside of union membership in such a case, and like I said before, there would probably be no room for you at the time.

- One final thing I’ll add is that private ownership breeds collectivity as if capital (means of production) are owned by independent people, then free workers would have to work FOR others which naturally groups together the labor pool under one command.
I'm out of energy to keep fighting. The syndicate stole all of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top